> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> doug foxvog
> Verzonden: woensdag 28 november 2012 20:07
> Aan: [ontolog-forum]
> Onderwerp: Re: [ontolog-forum] doing standards [was - Re: Webby objects]
> On Wed, November 28, 2012 08:29, Andries van Renssen wrote
> > Separating NL vocabularies from Ontology terms is one option, but IMHO
> > not the best one.
> Since an ontology term should have only one meaning and an NL term should
>normally have multiple
> meanings, separating them seems to make sense, imho.
[AvR] The constraint that an ontology term should have only one meaning is a
constraint that is not valid for all ontologies. You
may create a particular ontology with such a constraint. But ontologies that do
not apply that constraint can still be valid and
high quality ontologies, provided they apply another method to distinguish
> Computer programs do not operate using NL terms -- although COBOL tried to
>look a little bit like it
> > Creating a separate Ontologies language that only maps to NL terms
> > unnecessarily isolates the ontology world from the application world.
> What computer applications do you know of which internally operate using NL
[AvR] You seem to discuss programming languages, whereas we talk about data, as
terms for concepts.
Databases are full of NL terms and databases for knowledge are full of NL terms
for concepts. (03)
> > There are solutions to solve synonym and homonym management and use
> > without such a separation.
> ... such as the Oxford English Dictionary.
> -- doug f
> > Andries
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:22 PM, doug foxvog <
> > <mailto:doug@xxxxxxxxxx> doug@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, November 22, 2012 16:59, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
> >> Sure, Amanda, and that's why I (and we) advocate using natural
> >> language vocabularies that are linked/mapped to ontologies.
> > If you are referring to advocating the separation of NL vocabularies
> > from ontology term names, we certainly agree. The ontology needs to
> > express an N-N mapping between NL terms and ontology terms.
> >> This was a hard lesson
> >> learned (initially, by others, before my time) in the DoD in the
> >> early 1990s, and that I personally experienced in the metadata wars
> >> of the 2000s, where people will fight to the death to include their
> >> "words", mistaking these for the concepts behind them.*
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (05)